The congregation was singing a traditional composition from Salomon Sulzer, a cantor-composer who lived from 1804 till 1890. His Shema is a mainstay in synagogues, Messianic and non-Messianic alike. Not surprisingly, it's simple and has a vocal range of four notes, making it ideal for a congregation of untrained voices.

The chants at your link aren't more authentic than Sulzer's Shema: they're ornate and melismatic--the kind of music that requires a well-trained voice. Since Eastern Orthodoxy uses both chants and simple responses, no doubt you can sense where I'm coming from.

If you're interested in reading more about Salomon Sulzer, you might check the Wikipedia article here:

I am having some difficulty with the statement," Christianity is the genuine continuation of Judaism." The Old Testament law inspires one to fulfill the commandments chiefly for the sake of an earthly , temporal prosperity, the New Testament law inspires one to higher, eternal, spiritual goods. The Old Testament law was not abrogated by the Saviour: it was placed upon a better foundation. With the coming of the New Testament, it was only the Jewish ritual law that was abrogated. The law of the Gospel is given for all times unto the end of the age, and is not subject to being abrogated or changed. The law of the Gospel is given fro all men, and not for one people alone, as was the Old Testament law. The faith and teachings of the Gospel are called by the Fathers of the Church"Catholic", embracing all men at all times. Salvation is through faith in Christ and His teachings.

Hahaha. Er...not exactly that, but I just wanted to point out the difference between the "Messianic Jewish" LARPing and the real thing. There are also other authentic traditions (that likewise don't sound anything like what's in the Messianic video); I just happened to know the Yemenite video already, so it was easy to find and post.

Samaritan is also kinda cool. But modern Hebrew pronunciation (which is basically just German/Dutch pronunciation) is hideous and sounds no more Semitic than the thick Brooklyn accent you often hear from American rabbis.

The congregation was singing a traditional composition from Salomon Sulzer, a cantor-composer who lived from 1804 till 1890. His Shema is a mainstay in synagogues, Messianic and non-Messianic alike. Not surprisingly, it's simple and has a vocal range of four notes, making it ideal for a congregation of untrained voices.

The chants at your link aren't more authentic than Sulzer's Shema: they're ornate and melismatic--the kind of music that requires a well-trained voice. Since Eastern Orthodoxy uses both chants and simple responses, no doubt you can sense where I'm coming from.

Not at all, in fact. I'm not EO. The Coptic Church's chants and modes are something different entirely, bearing a much greater relation to the melismatic chant of the Mizrahim than anything from the EO, though of course with their own personality. Here is one example from the morning praises.

If you'll note my reply to Orthodox11, the point is not that only Yemenite pronunciation should be considered authentic, but that what is heard in the Messianic video is...eh...something else. Here is Sulzer's version of the Shema, by the way. I'll leave it to the readers of this thread to compare it to what is in the Messianic video and see how close or far off the Messiancs are. To my ears, it seems quite far off (more of a "campfire version" of Sulzer), though I'm willing to admit that my perception is probably colored by my belief that the Messianics are quite far off doctrinally from either camp they are trying to identify with.

And, yes, as Orthodox11 just replied, the Ashkenazic pronunciation of Hebrew leaves something to be desired, in terms of its faithfulness to the Semitic nature of the language (loss of 'ayn, to use but one example). That was another reason I posted a specifically Yeminite Shema, as it is the Yemenite and other Mizrahi Jews who keep the a more "Semitic" pronunciation of Hebrew. The Sephardim also do a good job of keeping it relatively traditional... (though their phonology, under influence of Spanish, also shows some differences, such as collapse of "b" and "v" that is retained by Moroccans and others, whereas apparently in Ladino they are separate phonemes; heck, in some dialects of Peninsular Spanish they are [or nearly are] separate phonemes.)

The congregation was singing a traditional composition from Salomon Sulzer, a cantor-composer who lived from 1804 till 1890. His Shema is a mainstay in synagogues, Messianic and non-Messianic alike. Not surprisingly, it's simple and has a vocal range of four notes, making it ideal for a congregation of untrained voices.

The chants at your link aren't more authentic than Sulzer's Shema: they're ornate and melismatic--the kind of music that requires a well-trained voice. Since Eastern Orthodoxy uses both chants and simple responses, no doubt you can sense where I'm coming from.

Not at all, in fact. I'm not EO. The Coptic Church's chants and modes are something different entirely, bearing a much greater relation to the melismatic chant of the Mizrahim than anything from the EO, though of course with their own personality. Here is one example from the morning praises.

If you'll note my reply to Orthodox11, the point is not that only Yemenite pronunciation should be considered authentic, but that what is heard in the Messianic video is...eh...something else. Here is Sulzer's version of the Shema, by the way. I'll leave it to the readers of this thread to compare it to what is in the Messianic video and see how close or far off the Messiancs are. To my ears, it seems quite far off (more of a "campfire version" of Sulzer), though I'm willing to admit that my perception is probably colored by my belief that the Messianics are quite far off doctrinally from either camp they are trying to identify with.

And, yes, as Orthodox11 just replied, the Ashkenazic pronunciation of Hebrew leaves something to be desired, in terms of its faithfulness to the Semitic nature of the language (loss of 'ayn, to use but one example). That was another reason I posted a specifically Yeminite Shema, as it is the Yemenite and other Mizrahi Jews who keep the a more "Semitic" pronunciation of Hebrew. The Sephardim also do a good job of keeping it relatively traditional... (though their phonology, under influence of Spanish, also shows some differences, such as collapse of "b" and "v" that is retained by Moroccans and others, whereas apparently in Ladino they are separate phonemes; heck, in some dialects of Peninsular Spanish they are [or nearly are] separate phonemes.)

Thanks for your link to the Shema. According to your link, that version of the Shema was sung at Yom Kippur. It's a bit different from the version I've heard sung on weekly Sabbaths, but maybe Sulzer wrote more than one version.

The congregational version I recall, the one sung at Beth Messiah, is on the CD "Thank God It's Friday!" If my memory hasn't failed me, this version may have also been sung in the movie "Schindler's List." You may be able to hear it at this link from Barnes & Noble:

The congregation was singing a traditional composition from Salomon Sulzer, a cantor-composer who lived from 1804 till 1890. His Shema is a mainstay in synagogues, Messianic and non-Messianic alike. Not surprisingly, it's simple and has a vocal range of four notes, making it ideal for a congregation of untrained voices.

The chants at your link aren't more authentic than Sulzer's Shema: they're ornate and melismatic--the kind of music that requires a well-trained voice. Since Eastern Orthodoxy uses both chants and simple responses, no doubt you can sense where I'm coming from.

Not at all, in fact. I'm not EO. The Coptic Church's chants and modes are something different entirely, bearing a much greater relation to the melismatic chant of the Mizrahim than anything from the EO, though of course with their own personality. Here is one example from the morning praises.

If you'll note my reply to Orthodox11, the point is not that only Yemenite pronunciation should be considered authentic, but that what is heard in the Messianic video is...eh...something else. Here is Sulzer's version of the Shema, by the way. I'll leave it to the readers of this thread to compare it to what is in the Messianic video and see how close or far off the Messiancs are. To my ears, it seems quite far off (more of a "campfire version" of Sulzer), though I'm willing to admit that my perception is probably colored by my belief that the Messianics are quite far off doctrinally from either camp they are trying to identify with.

And, yes, as Orthodox11 just replied, the Ashkenazic pronunciation of Hebrew leaves something to be desired, in terms of its faithfulness to the Semitic nature of the language (loss of 'ayn, to use but one example). That was another reason I posted a specifically Yeminite Shema, as it is the Yemenite and other Mizrahi Jews who keep the a more "Semitic" pronunciation of Hebrew. The Sephardim also do a good job of keeping it relatively traditional... (though their phonology, under influence of Spanish, also shows some differences, such as collapse of "b" and "v" that is retained by Moroccans and others, whereas apparently in Ladino they are separate phonemes; heck, in some dialects of Peninsular Spanish they are [or nearly are] separate phonemes.)

Thanks for your link to the Shema. According to your link, that version of the Shema was sung at Yom Kippur. It's a bit different from the version I've heard sung on weekly Sabbaths, but maybe Sulzer wrote more than one version.

The congregational version I recall, the one sung at Beth Messiah, is on the CD "Thank God It's Friday!" If my memory hasn't failed me, this version may have also been sung in the movie "Schindler's List." You may be able to hear it at this link from Barnes & Noble:

I am having some difficulty with the statement," Christianity is the genuine continuation of Judaism." The Old Testament law inspires one to fulfill the commandments chiefly for the sake of an earthly , temporal prosperity, the New Testament law inspires one to higher, eternal, spiritual goods. The Old Testament law was not abrogated by the Saviour: it was placed upon a better foundation. With the coming of the New Testament, it was only the Jewish ritual law that was abrogated. The law of the Gospel is given for all times unto the end of the age, and is not subject to being abrogated or changed. The law of the Gospel is given fro all men, and not for one people alone, as was the Old Testament law. The faith and teachings of the Gospel are called by the Fathers of the Church"Catholic", embracing all men at all times. Salvation is through faith in Christ and His teachings.

Have you looked into the Orthodox Church?

Vasily, I'm back and trying to figure out what posts to reply to. Yes, I have been looking into the Orthodox Church, but no, I didn't describe Christianity as "the genuine continuation of Judaism." I think Azul, who's Eastern Orthodox, wrote that in Reply 76:

" Jesus did not made a new religion.Christianity is the continuance of true Judaism, it has and it carries in herself(Christianity) Judaism .. Both the Old and the New.. The New in the Old concealed , the Old in the New revealed.. The Gospel carries in itself the Torah , just like the adult always carries in himself his own childhood.Christianity is and identifies itself with Judaism of the Old.. You will find many similarities between the Orthodox Church and Orthodox Judaism(Talmudic Judaism)."

I hope your weekend went well.

Logged

"Iron sharpens iron, and a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17 OSB).

I would like to recommend the following book, which you might find interesting. Surprised by Christ- by Rev. A. James Bernstein- Conciliar PressHe is a convert from Judaism to Orthodox Christianity.

Have you ever considered or looked into the Orthodox Church?

Thanks for the information about Rev. Bernstein and his book. I'd not known that he wrote down his testimony about his conversion. I'll try to get a copy of that book.

Yes, I've considered the Orthodox Church for several years, and I've picked up a copy of The Orthodox Study Bible as well as a catechism and some other books. In my hometown there are about four Orthodox congregations: a GOA church, an OCA mission, a Syrian Orthodox Church, and an Egyptian Orthodox Church. Most of my contact has been with the GOA church, which puts on a Greek festival every fall and has a bookstore. The church tour during the festival has been interesting, and I've been struck by the symbolism in the icons and in some carvings.

Logged

"Iron sharpens iron, and a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17 OSB).

I would like to recommend the following book, which you might find interesting. Surprised by Christ- by Rev. A. James Bernstein- Conciliar PressHe is a convert from Judaism to Orthodox Christianity.

Have you ever considered or looked into the Orthodox Church?

Thanks for the information about Rev. Bernstein and his book. I'd not known that he wrote down his testimony about his conversion. I'll try to get a copy of that book.

Yes, I've considered the Orthodox Church for several years, and I've picked up a copy of The Orthodox Study Bible as well as a catechism and some other books. In my hometown there are about four Orthodox congregations: a GOA church, an OCA mission, a Syrian Orthodox Church, and an Egyptian Orthodox Church. Most of my contact has been with the GOA church, which puts on a Greek festival every fall and has a bookstore. The church tour during the festival has been interesting, and I've been struck by the symbolism in the icons and in some carvings.

I recommend, if you genuinely do want to learn more about Orthodoxy, that you read the Rainbow Series, by Fr. Thomas Hopko. Here is a link to the OCA's website, with all four volumes online: http://oca.org/orthodoxy/the-orthodox-faith I just finished reading them, on the recommendation of my priest. They have a wealth of information and, while I read them after having studied Orthodoxy for quite a while, I think they are easily accessible even to someone who knows nothing about the Church. Also, read Met. Kallistos' books The Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Way.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

I'm all for Jewish use of the G-D in order to avoid saying/writing the Name, but this is more than excessive.

Is this usage normal in Messianic congregations?

For more than a decade, rabbis have been saying the practice of using hyphens in "G-d" and "L-rd" is a modern fad that would soon pass. As you know, the fad is still going strong.

In the Messianic Jewish Alliance of America, I've seen these hyphenated words in letters but never in published books or pamphlets. As you've noticed, I spell out the words "God" and "Lord." I've noticed them fully spelled in non-MJAA books such as Dr. David Stern's Complete Jewish Bible, Jewish New Testament Commentary, and Messianic Jewish Manifesto as well as in the non-Messianic Jewish Publication Society's JPS Study Bible.

People who use the hyphens have told me that that when a paper with "God" or "Lord" on it is discarded, that's like throwing away part of God. I note, though, that in Numbers 5:11-31, which concerns wives suspected of adultery, the Sacred Name is included in a curse that the priest was supposed to write and then scrape or wash away (Numbers 5:20-24 in the New King James Version).

« Last Edit: March 06, 2012, 11:08:26 AM by mathetes »

Logged

"Iron sharpens iron, and a man sharpens the countenance of his friend" (Proverbs 27:17 OSB).

Mathetes, I think it ironic that the anonymous "mathetes" of the famous early writing "Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus" regarded the sect of rabbinic judaism with some contempt:

"And next, I imagine that you are most desirous of hearing something on this point, that the Christians do not observe the same forms of divine worship as do the Jews. The Jews, then, if they abstain from the kind of service above described, and deem it proper to worship one God as being Lord of all, [are right]; but if they offer Him worship in the way which we have described, they greatly err. For while the Gentiles, by offering such things to those that are destitute of sense and hearing, furnish an example of madness; they, on the other hand by thinking to offer these things to God as if He needed them, might justly reckon it rather an act of folly than of divine worship. For He that made heaven and earth, and all that is therein, and gives to us all the things of which we stand in need, certainly requires none of those things which He Himself bestows on such as think of furnishing them to Him.

But those who imagine that, by means of blood, and the smoke of sacrifices and burnt-offerings, they offer sacrifices [acceptable] to Him, and that by such honours they show Him respect,--these, by supposing that they can give anything to Him who stands in need of nothing, appear to me in no respect to differ from those who studiously confer the same honour on things destitute of sense, and which therefore are unable to enjoy such honours.

But as to their scrupulosity concerning meats, and their superstition as respects the Sabbaths, and their boasting about circumcision, and their fancies about fasting and the new moons, which are utterly ridiculous and unworthy of notice,--I do not think that you require to learn anything from me. For, to accept some of those things which have been formed by God for the use of men as properly formed, and to reject others as useless and redundant,--how can this be lawful? And to speak falsely of God, as if He forbade us to do what is good on the Sabbath-days,--how is not this impious? And to glory in the circumcision of the flesh as a proof of election, and as if, on account of it, they were specially beloved by God,--how is it not a subject of ridicule?

And as to their observing months and days, as if waiting upon the stars and the moon, and their distributing, according to their own tendencies, the appointments of God, and the vicissitudes of the seasons, some for festivities, and others for mourning,--who would deem this a part of divine worship, and not much rather a manifestation of folly? I suppose, then, you are sufficiently convinced that the Christians properly abstain from the vanity and error common [to both Jews and Gentiles], and from the busy-body spirit and vain boasting of the Jews; but you must not hope to learn the mystery of their peculiar mode of worshipping God from any mortal."

« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 11:24:05 PM by NicholasMyra »

Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm

if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

I think it's really pointless to debate this issue on will a christian forum. Mathetes I understand you wanting to defend you choice on views but your pretty much talking to people who are closed off in heart and mind to anything that would lead to a good debate

I think it's really pointless to debate this issue on will a christian forum. Mathetes I understand you wanting to defend you choice on views but your pretty much talking to people who are closed off in heart and mind to anything that would lead to a good debate

lol.

Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm

if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

I think it's really pointless to debate this issue on will a christian forum. Mathetes I understand you wanting to defend you choice on views but your pretty much talking to people who are closed off in heart and mind to anything that would lead to a good debate

To the contrary, Mathetes seems to be doing just fine. I don't speak for him, but I assume he can make the call himself as to whether the debate is good, worthwhile or not.Are you uncomfortable about him continuing the dialog?

Logged

North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).

I think it's really pointless to debate this issue on will a christian forum. Mathetes I understand you wanting to defend you choice on views but your pretty much talking to people who are closed off in heart and mind to anything that would lead to a good debate

To the contrary, Mathetes seems to be doing just fine. I don't speak for him, but I assume he can make the call himself as to whether the debate is good, worthwhile or not.Are you uncomfortable about him continuing the dialog?

You, Mathetes or anyone else can post whatever you want. I was just giving my thoughts on the subject

Someone mentioned upthread (way, way upthread) that they wondered what Jews think of "Messianic Judaism". While I am not Jewish myself, from interactions with several Orthodox Jews and at least one Conservative Jew, the consensus was unanimous: they found it abhorrent. They viewed it as a Christian ploy to trick Jews into becoming Christian with Jewish trappings, but without actual Judaism. Essentially, as completely dishonest.

When I was Protestant, I briefly (blessedly briefly) considered MJ. As others have astutely discerned, I was truly looking for tradition and roots. At that point I was totally unaware of Christian history, so in my mind before the Reformation there was Judaism. I never made it off of my couch and into a MJ service however, because my study led me to conclude that MJism is irreconcilable with Christian theology (Acts, Galatians...).

Anyway, popping out of lurkdom to toss in my $.02.

Cheers!

Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14

Someone mentioned upthread (way, way upthread) that they wondered what Jews think of "Messianic Judaism". While I am not Jewish myself, from interactions with several Orthodox Jews and at least one Conservative Jew, the consensus was unanimous: they found it abhorrent. They viewed it as a Christian ploy to trick Jews into becoming Christian with Jewish trappings, but without actual Judaism. Essentially, as completely dishonest.

When I was Protestant, I briefly (blessedly briefly) considered MJ. As others have astutely discerned, I was truly looking for tradition and roots. At that point I was totally unaware of Christian history, so in my mind before the Reformation there was Judaism. I never made it off of my couch and into a MJ service however, because my study led me to conclude that MJism is irreconcilable with Christian theology (Acts, Galatians...).

Someone mentioned upthread (way, way upthread) that they wondered what Jews think of "Messianic Judaism". While I am not Jewish myself, from interactions with several Orthodox Jews and at least one Conservative Jew, the consensus was unanimous: they found it abhorrent. They viewed it as a Christian ploy to trick Jews into becoming Christian with Jewish trappings, but without actual Judaism. Essentially, as completely dishonest.

When I was Protestant, I briefly (blessedly briefly) considered MJ. As others have astutely discerned, I was truly looking for tradition and roots. At that point I was totally unaware of Christian history, so in my mind before the Reformation there was Judaism. I never made it off of my couch and into a MJ service however, because my study led me to conclude that MJism is irreconcilable with Christian theology (Acts, Galatians...).

I have read the info on the website the "Messianic Jewish Alliance of America". They call for the restoration of Israel and are tied to Christian Zionists. In fulfillment of the prophecy, the spiritual restoration of Israel was initiated within the context of the Jesus People Revival.

I have some questions.

Is the messianic movement a Zionist one? Do the major Orthodox Jewish groups teach the same things(the restoration of the Temple)? I am aware of other Messianic groups, do you have contact with them? Are they aware of Orthodox Christianity?

I have read the info on the website the "Messianic Jewish Alliance of America". They call for the restoration of Israel and are tied to Christian Zionists. In fulfillment of the prophecy, the spiritual restoration of Israel was initiated within the context of the Jesus People Revival.

I have some questions.

Is the messianic movement a Zionist one? Do the major Orthodox Jewish groups teach the same things(the restoration of the Temple)? I am aware of other Messianic groups, do you have contact with them? Are they aware of Orthodox Christianity?

I can only answer 2 of your 3 questions Is the Messianic movement a Zionist one? Plain and simple NO most people in this movement are not even Jewish. You do seam to come off on this question as if Zionist are bad but is there really any problem with people being proud of who they are. Were not the ones with Greek, Russian, German etc etc above or in our shul names just something to think about on who's boosting more pride.

Do the major Orthodox Jewish groups teach the same things (the restoration of the Temple)? We Jews really don't have um what you call dogma to teachings. If you were to put a few of us in one room and ask us this question you would get a handful of different answers. In the most part we do look for the new Temple to be built now does that mean stone and brick some may say yes some may think spiritual depending on whom or what Rabbi or Sage you follow

I would like to make one other point that I neglected to mention. It is when pride ( in most cases ethnic or nationalistic) becomes the major force, and the very fact that their faith becomes second in nature. In the Orthodox world, we confess the same faith, but there exists individuals who place being Greek, Russian or Ukraine as being the most important.As far as Zionism, from what I know it has nothing to do with the faith or practice of Judaism, but the fact that "I am Jewish". Is it more important to know that I am Jew or that I am a religious Jew, who worships at Temple and follows the Torah?

I think zionism goes beyond that and enters into the spheres of discrimination and racism.

Really so what did your G-d mean when he said that pigs ( non Jews) weren't worth his pearls or something like this. I still see you follow after him. Zionism is not about race or discrimination when you set down and read what the Torah has to say we are to be set apart now that don't mean we are to be mean to others but we must keep hold of the law and faith so as to lead others back to there G-d. Be it as Noahide law keepers or Jew's but one does not have to be a Jew to follow after the one true G-d and have a place and a good taste of the world to come. Thats what it means when it says that we (Jew's) are the light of this world and many will come and say your Jew and we know that G-d is with you let us follow after you and teach us of G-d.

I think zionism goes beyond that and enters into the spheres of discrimination and racism.

Really so what did your G-d mean when he said that pigs ( non Jews) weren't worth his pearls or something like this. I still see you follow after him. Zionism is not about race or discrimination when you set down and read what the Torah has to say we are to be set apart now that don't mean we are to be mean to others but we must keep hold of the law and faith so as to lead others back to there G-d. Be it as Noahide law keepers or Jew's but one does not have to be a Jew to follow after the one true G-d and have a place and a good taste of the world to come. Thats what it means when it says that we (Jew's) are the light of this world and many will come and say your Jew and we know that G-d is with you let us follow after you and teach us of G-d.

He didn`t mean that.He tested their faith.He said that in order to see if the Apostles would stick to the interpretation of their religion or not and to test and show the faith of the phoenician woman.Now the roles are kind of reversed don`t you think?If you insist on refering to someone as a pig or as a dog than the "Jews" are your people.

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

I think zionism goes beyond that and enters into the spheres of discrimination and racism.

Really so what did your G-d mean when he said that pigs ( non Jews) weren't worth his pearls or something like this. I still see you follow after him. Zionism is not about race or discrimination when you set down and read what the Torah has to say we are to be set apart now that don't mean we are to be mean to others but we must keep hold of the law and faith so as to lead others back to there G-d. Be it as Noahide law keepers or Jew's but one does not have to be a Jew to follow after the one true G-d and have a place and a good taste of the world to come. Thats what it means when it says that we (Jew's) are the light of this world and many will come and say your Jew and we know that G-d is with you let us follow after you and teach us of G-d.

He didn`t mean that.He tested their faith.He said that in order to see if the Apostles would stick to the interpretation of their religion or not and to test and show the faith of the phoenician woman.Now the roles are kind of reversed don`t you think?If you insist on refering to someone as a pig or as a dog than the "Jews" are your people.

You Got one thing right Jew's are my people as I'm a Jew but as far as the other part I thought G-d never changes his mind cause he's not like us to do so. If you don't like the word and meaning of non Jew's then you would need to take that up with G-d and not me I can't answer for him.

I think zionism goes beyond that and enters into the spheres of discrimination and racism.

Really so what did your G-d mean when he said that pigs ( non Jews) weren't worth his pearls or something like this. I still see you follow after him. Zionism is not about race or discrimination when you set down and read what the Torah has to say we are to be set apart now that don't mean we are to be mean to others but we must keep hold of the law and faith so as to lead others back to there G-d. Be it as Noahide law keepers or Jew's but one does not have to be a Jew to follow after the one true G-d and have a place and a good taste of the world to come. Thats what it means when it says that we (Jew's) are the light of this world and many will come and say your Jew and we know that G-d is with you let us follow after you and teach us of G-d.

He didn`t mean that.He tested their faith.He said that in order to see if the Apostles would stick to the interpretation of their religion or not and to test and show the faith of the phoenician woman.Now the roles are kind of reversed don`t you think?If you insist on refering to someone as a pig or as a dog than the "Jews" are your people.

You Got one thing right Jew's are my people as I'm a Jew but as far as the other part I thought G-d never changes his mind cause he's not like us to do so. If you don't like the word and meaning of non Jew's then you would need to take that up with G-d and not me I can't answer for him.

Ah, but is it "Jews" or "Israel" who are the chosen people? Israel, of course. And the Church is Israel.

Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice. Can you guess what it is?

I think zionism goes beyond that and enters into the spheres of discrimination and racism.

Really so what did your G-d mean when he said that pigs ( non Jews) weren't worth his pearls or something like this. I still see you follow after him. Zionism is not about race or discrimination when you set down and read what the Torah has to say we are to be set apart now that don't mean we are to be mean to others but we must keep hold of the law and faith so as to lead others back to there G-d. Be it as Noahide law keepers or Jew's but one does not have to be a Jew to follow after the one true G-d and have a place and a good taste of the world to come. Thats what it means when it says that we (Jew's) are the light of this world and many will come and say your Jew and we know that G-d is with you let us follow after you and teach us of G-d.

He didn`t mean that.He tested their faith.He said that in order to see if the Apostles would stick to the interpretation of their religion or not and to test and show the faith of the phoenician woman.Now the roles are kind of reversed don`t you think?If you insist on refering to someone as a pig or as a dog than the "Jews" are your people.

You Got one thing right Jew's are my people as I'm a Jew but as far as the other part I thought G-d never changes his mind cause he's not like us to do so. If you don't like the word and meaning of non Jew's then you would need to take that up with G-d and not me I can't answer for him.

your god does not exist.

« Last Edit: March 19, 2012, 12:10:09 PM by Azul »

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

When Christ talks to the gentile woman, she says even the dogs can lick the crumbs from the table and JEsus praises her for her great faith. Gentiles at this time were like Dogs because they were not of israel and did not have God with them though this would change when Israel was open to the gentiles via the church.

When Christ talks to the gentile woman, she says even the dogs can lick the crumbs from the table and JEsus praises her for her great faith. Gentiles at this time were like Dogs because they were not of israel and did not have God with them though this would change when Israel was open to the gentiles via the church.

The thing is that Jesus didn`t really ment what he said.He did that for their faith.He actually helped the woman and gave his bread to her.

Logged

Every formula of every religion has in this age of reason, to submit to the acid test of reason and universal assent.Mahatma Gandhi

When Christ talks to the gentile woman, she says even the dogs can lick the crumbs from the table and JEsus praises her for her great faith. Gentiles at this time were like Dogs because they were not of israel and did not have God with them though this would change when Israel was open to the gentiles via the church.

The thing is that Jesus didn`t really ment what he said.He did that for their faith.He actually helped the woman and gave his bread to her.

I think Jesus did. St John Chrysostom affirms this interpretation that the gentiles at that time lacked a state of grace that the jews had and were dogs. But it is also true, Jesus recognised this woman's great faith and helped her regardless.

If you don't like the word and meaning of non Jew's then you would need to take that up with G-d and not me I can't answer for him

and folks wonder why so many believe Zionism is racist......

PP

I can't answer for what is written in the scrolls I didn't write them. Then the question becomes do you think the Torah is the word of G-d ? My answer is yes so when people get mad at what is wrote and said in it then in my mind the have a problem with G-d. I can't answer for G-d or even try to.

When Christ talks to the gentile woman, she says even the dogs can lick the crumbs from the table and JEsus praises her for her great faith. Gentiles at this time were like Dogs because they were not of israel and did not have God with them though this would change when Israel was open to the gentiles via the church.

The thing is that Jesus didn`t really ment what he said.He did that for their faith.He actually helped the woman and gave his bread to her.

I think it's really pointless to debate this issue on will a christian forum. Mathetes I understand you wanting to defend you choice on views but your pretty much talking to people who are closed off in heart and mind to anything that would lead to a good debate

Once you have found the Truth, why entertain falsehood? That we win the debate doesn't mean it wasn't good.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.A hasty quarrel kindles fire,and urgent strife sheds blood.If you blow on a spark, it will glow;if you spit on it, it will be put out; and both come out of your mouth

If you don't like the word and meaning of non Jew's then you would need to take that up with G-d and not me I can't answer for him

and folks wonder why so many believe Zionism is racist......

PP

I can't answer for what is written in the scrolls I didn't write them. Then the question becomes do you think the Torah is the word of G-d ? My answer is yes so when people get mad at what is wrote and said in it then in my mind the have a problem with G-d. I can't answer for G-d or even try to.

You have to read in context of what is going on, and ask "Why was this put here? What is going on? To whom is this being addressed?" Just reading without any background of what is going on can really skew what is really being said. Was Jesus really calling all Jews swine? Did Paul have an all-out attack on The Law? Or was this a narrative of something going on that was being reacted to?

PP

Logged

"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker